There was a male nurse doing the same kind of thing in the usa, except it was adults. I believe netflix are bringing out a show about it. The Good Nurse. I think as well he would inject insulin into them to kill them.
Nurse Lucy Letby - guilty of murdering 7 babies - whole life sentence
- Thread starter Raulduke
- Start date
There was a male nurse doing the same kind of thing in the usa, except it was adults. I believe netflix are bringing out a show about it. The Good Nurse. I think as well he would inject insulin into them to kill them.
As sick as it is, it's useful to hear it from the murderer themselves why they did what they did. There will always be experts analysing it which is needed but hearing the bastard say why I always find interesting. The interviews with gangs, cartel members, people on death row etc. themselves are always more fascinating than a doctor saying they did it because of x
Was thinking the same when I skim read the trial earlier. Seems a lot of circumstantial evidence.
However, they’ve brought up the fact she searched the parents of the deceased babies up on Facebook. Which seems weird.
The trial is scheduled to run for 6 months. There’ll be a huge of scientific and forensic evidence given but I think it’s reasonably clear at this point that there’s no smoking gun. First, they’ll have to prove that these children were murdered, and by what means. Then they will have to show that she was involved. It’ll be a brick by brick approach and it’s very likely she’ll have some good days in terms of being able to undermine the evidence, because of the subjective nature of some of the opinions that will be offered.
Is insulin a controlled drug? My missus works in anaesthetics and they can't get any drugs out without signing them first, but I'm not sure if that's just controlled drugs or not.
very very disturbing that she is even in this position.
She is one evil cnut
She is one evil cnut
I am sure the evidence which is reported in the press is not the entirety of the prosecution's evidence/case, otherwise, the defense would be able to work against it.
Not a controlled drug. It’s only really opiates, benzodiazepines, ketamine etc that have to be signed for individually. I could walk to our pharmacy cupboard in theatre now and get insulin if I wanted.
Ah I thought it might be that.
fecking hell
Ugh. Why do I read such things 
Sickening.
I don't get it man. Was doing that so enjoyable to her that it was worth whatever sentence and life she will live for the remainder of her days? Same goes for most crimes.
Greenwood is a perfect example. Playing for one of the biggest clubs in the world, so much money, adored by millions and then throw that all away to get his dick wet... Bloody hell.
Greenwood is a perfect example. Playing for one of the biggest clubs in the world, so much money, adored by millions and then throw that all away to get his dick wet... Bloody hell.
Absolutely sickening.
That's a weird way to describe domestic abuse
Wasn't it rape? Dunno, I can't remember the details now but my point stands that people do some stupid shit and throw away their lives. I wonder how they feel about it after they get caught.
We can't really go into it too much bit it's also a feckin weird way to describe rape.
Yeah I guess so.
Could only get half way through that, can’t imagine what the jury will be feeling after six months of this.
Not for me to reach a conclusion after two days of prosecution opening statements in a six-month trial, but I honestly can only see this going one way.
Sorry the phrasing there wound me up a bit, it would seem.
To answer your question, a serial killer usually has a compulsion to do these things which over-rides all other considerations. It's not like she could have just decided not to kill babies (allegedly) and lived a happy little life. If she did it, she's clearly deranged.
The human mind is such a great thing but can also be so fecking dark.
Sick, sick bitch. Probably my most right wing opinion is that capital punishment should be brought back for evil fecks like this oxygen thief.
Why are people so quick to judge!?
Two days into a trial, where only the prosecution has spoken, yet people are condemning this woman already.
Let the trial play out, the jury cast judgement, then by all means judge her based on the outcome.
Two days into a trial, where only the prosecution has spoken, yet people are condemning this woman already.
Let the trial play out, the jury cast judgement, then by all means judge her based on the outcome.
She sent weird texts to her friends after the fact, stalked the families on Facebook and it was only under her care that babies would suffer from air embolisms. Where there is smoke there is fire.
‘Innocent until proven guilty’ is a specific court phrase referring to proof beyond reasonable doubt for prosecution ffs. It doesn’t mean people on Internet forums etc. can never come to their own conclusions based on what we have read so far
Christ. That's awful.
Whilst you are entitled to believe and think what you wish, we have so far only read/heard two days of prosecution, in what will be a six month trial.
I believe someone on this very thread referenced a case very similar to this whereby the nurse involved got found guilty only to be exonerated after imprisonment.
Careful with early judgements as they can lead to tunnel vision later on.
And we all know that people on internet forums are always right!
Sounds to me like she should hang for what she did, but I'll wait for an actual court with lawyers, judges and juries to determine for sure.
That’s not what I’m saying. EYE personally believe, based on the facts that the article has mentioned so far, that if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it’s a duck. If I am wrong and she is completely innocent because they find that something else caused the deaths then I will happily hold my hands up.
Last edited:
This seems pretty damning
Don't you see how this is exactly what you're snarkily mocking? People who are talking about her as if she's guilty aren't literally going to form a mob, storm the courthouse and hang her before the verdict is in. @Sara125 is absolutely correct to point out that "guilty until proven innocent" is a strictly legal concept, and has no bearing whatsoever on the way people talk about something online.
Russia hasn't been found guilty of war crimes, but I don't see you in the Russian Invasion of Ukraine thread admonishing people for talking like it's a fact (which it is, whether it has been legally proven yet or not).
The difference is I'm not going around saying I've already made my mind up.
Interesting to read she’s suspected of at least 1 more murder but isn’t charged with it. A baby died after her breathing tube slipped to far into their throat. Deliberate tampering is suggested as the most likely cause.
cases like this there should be a high bar of proof that leads to the noose.
cases like this there should be a high bar of proof that leads to the noose.
There's physical proof of war crimes splashed all over the internet, news channels and multiple governments have suggested war crimes have happened,
Here we have heard one side of the story, for three days now, judgements have been made way to quickly, probably due to the emotional aspect of the case, but too quickly none the less.
Let's listen to all the evidence and see what the defence has to say.
This would be pretty damning if this was the only murder she was accused of.
But when the doctor thought to check on her because they were already suspicious, I mean, there’s no doubting she’s guilty is there?
I had the same opinion and even thought her name should have renamed anonymous for the the duration of case but then I read the statements from her fellow doctors.
My issue with this is if they had a suspicion she was hurting babies why leave her alone with them? She should had been monitored. They might have been able to save a few.